Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
As NY Times Attacks Obama, Records Declassified To Put NSA Program In Proper Perspective
Saturday, June 8, 2013 5:42 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:Oh, to be president. To be in a position of such responsibility, demand, trust and foresight. To be expected to solve problems, prevent problems, imagine problems that will need to be solved later and then solve them now… and do it all while making everyone in every group, faction, subculture, race, religion, creed, color, or political party happy. Can’t be done, can it? But every president tries. We at least believe that. Unless you decide to believe that a president is, at his core, a Machiavellian, manipulative, conniving, amoral puppet-master out to ensnare his electorate into a web of entrapment and oppression, sucked dry of civil liberties and a presumption of privacy. Do we believe that about our current president? Some do… certainly we’ve heard from a lot of them over the years of Obama’s administration And now, it seems, venerable 4th Estate behemoth, The New York Times, does as well. Or at least enough that their Editorial Board has written a scathing editorial titled, President Obama’s Dragnet, in which they excoriate Obama in response to the recent reveal of the national security phone records program. Here are just a few of the salient comments in response to the editorial:Quote:This collection of data has been going on in the seven years that the The Patriot Act has been in effect. It’s time to repeal that act and discuss whether we need or want to spend the money to collect and analyze all this data. Obama is not to blame for this mess. Those who passed and supported the Patriot Act are responsible for this ‘unintended’ consequence. All this noise proves is that Americans want to have their cake and eat it. For right wingers who ordinarily would defend an action taken to boost security, there will be a sudden outbreak of love for civil liberties since it is Obama involved. We are so schizophrenic! When there’s a terrorist attack, there are always retrospectively discovered clues which were ignored or not synthesized properly, and there appears a groundswell of criticism concerning poor intelligence. But when there are prospective attempts to gather information, here comes the groundswell in the opposite direction. It is not possible to perfectly conciliate these differences, but the advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches must be evaluated carefully and rationally, and we need to avoid kneejerk responses in either direction. I’d rather have my personal information be known by a bureaucrat than be killed by a terrorist. I have nothing to hide. Only people who worry about this kind of stuff are crooks, libertarians, media insiders, and liberals. For the folks, it is the cost of living in the world we have, not the one we want. It’s good to take the President to task over what seems an overreach of power, but I think part of the outrage stems from the fact that it comes from Obama. Seems that nobody is surprised or upset that President Bush started this policy. Where was the NY Times when the laws were voted in beginning with Bush? Of course, there are just as many comments in fierce agreement with the NY Times; I’m not including them only because we know that drill; the heated rhetoric has reached oversaturation point, widely disseminated and zealously conspiratorial: our president is Satan, Stalin, Machiavelli, the sum of all evil, so on and so on. What was more interesting to me were the counterpoints; the comments of those who seem willing to look at the history of this situation (and as much as the right HATES when things are blamed on Bush, they really cannot erase the chronology of the Patriot Act), the nuances required of a president in balancing national security against civil liberties, and the general sense that President Obama is NOT twirling his mustache (I know he doesn’t have one…) while gloating over his oppression of the masses. Of course, if you hold to the notion that he is, and many people do, any and all nefarious intent can be applied to his actions… and they are. Even by the New York Times. Curiously, or perhaps in purposeful timing, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, made an “unusual late-night statement” Thursday night, taking his own strong stand against those who leaked the highly classified documents that outed the phone records programs in the first place, claiming it puts security at risk by alerting America’s enemies to the tactic, causing them, among other things, to change behaviors accordingly, making their intentions and potential planned actions harder to detect. From the Huffington Post:Quote:“The unauthorized disclosure of a top secret U.S. court document threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation,” Clapper said of the phone-tracking program. [... ] “I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said. Of course it is, but the problem with the way information is processed in this country, by an electorate that has long proven its willingness to believe lies, dismiss truth, eschew nuance, scream conspiracy, and denounce fact, is that nothing is ever viewed on face value, on its sheer reality. Instead, lines are drawn, sides are taken, intractable positions are held. From there, based on party affiliation, one’s level of embrace of conspiracy memes, or their general half-empty/half-full philosophy of life, people often reject truth. Reject information as it is presented. Suspicion reigns, with eyes close, ears plugged and mouths opened. As various members of Congress spoke out harshly against the phone records program (Rand Paul, R-Ky, called it an “astounding assault on the Constitution”), officials from Clapper’s office, as well as from the Justice Department, NSA, and the FBI, briefed 27 senators late Thursday in an attempt to clarify the fine-points of the program.Quote:_The program is conducted under authority granted by Congress and is authorized by the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Court which determines the legality of the program. _The government is prohibited from “indiscriminately sifting” through the data acquired. It can only be reviewed “when there is a reasonable suspicion, based on specific facts, that the particular basis for the query is associated with a foreign terrorist organization.” He also said only counterterrorism personnel trained in the program may access the records. _The information acquired is overseen by the Justice Department and the FISA court. Only a very small fraction of the records are ever reviewed, he said. _The program is reviewed every 90 days. Clapper said the Internet program, known as PRISM, can’t be used to intentionally target any Americans or anyone in the U.S, and that data accidentally collected about Americans is kept to a minimum. I laughed when I read the word “accidentally,” knowing full well that this verbiage will surely stir up conspiracy theorists to heatedly parse just what’s “accidental.” I can hardly blame them on that one! But the President himself spoke out about this for the first time today, making what, to many, is the most elemental point:Quote:“They help us prevent terrorist attacks,” Obama said. He said he has concluded that prevention is worth the “modest encroachments on privacy.” Obama said he came into office with a “healthy skepticism” of the program and increased some of the “safeguards” on the programs. He said Congress and federal judges have oversight on the program, and a judge would have to approve monitoring of the content of a call and it’s not a “program run amok.” “Nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” he said. “That’s not what this program’s about.” Certainly civil liberties are essential to every American; our country was founded on the principle and we hold dear our rights to privacy in every area of our lives. But we are no longer in the world of the 17oos; we are in a world of sophisticated terrorist networks, thuggish criminals hell-bent on fulfilling zealous crusades; global enemies who have no compunction about inflicting mass destruction on a country once protected by muskets and bayonets. And far from the days of town criers and the Pony Express, we now have a brilliant, instant and international information network that allows communication between our enemies to be transacted in the blink of an eye. And it is in this world we expect our leaders to keep us safe. Can we reconcile the challenge of that? It would seem many cannot. As one commenter put it, we cannot have it both ways; we cannot expect our leaders to leave no stone unturned to protect us from terrorists and those who would do us harm, then caterwaul when one of those stones is the accrual of phone records that might assist in identifying a planned attack. But still… we do. Even The Guardian, which was the source many other media outlets’ information and opinion (including the New York Times), made the following point on which the Huffington Post extrapolated:Quote:It does not authorize snooping into the content of phone calls. But with millions of phone records in hand, the NSA’s computers can analyze them for patterns, spot unusual behavior and identify “communities of interest” – networks of people in contact with targets or suspicious phone numbers overseas. The fact is, as many commenters on the NY Times editorial pointed out, the Patriot Act was birthed by the Bush Administration and most on the right not only supported it, but felt it was an essential tool to preventing another 9/11. It either has or no other such attack was planned anyway… we’ll never truly know. But do we, as Americans, feel confident enough that it won’t happen again that we’d push against measures such as these in lieu of our privacy? Or, just as we’ve gotten used to taking off our shoes and subjecting ourselves to airport scans, can we accept that these times demand a personal sacrifice of some privacy for the greater good. as the President stated? The NY Times editorial concludes with this:Quote:We are not questioning the legality under the Patriot Act of the court order disclosed by The Guardian. But we strongly object to using that power in this manner. It is the very sort of thing against which Mr. Obama once railed, when he said in 2007 that the surveillance policy of the George W. Bush administration “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.” Perhaps, however, what the President discovered upon taking office is the fact of governing, not the presumption. Perhaps upon bearing the title and responsibility of President of the United States, he came to find the demand for hard choices, decisions and actions that, prior to the presidency, he had not been fully aware existed… just as none of us can presume to know the minutia, details, and sheer glut of expectation and responsibility a president faces every day in making those exact choices between “liberties we cherish and the security we provide.” As for this president, the one the New York Times has decided to take to task, if one chooses to believe the man is, indeed, Satan/Stalin, one will see his intent as malicious. If, instead, one believes he is a moral, compassionate, but dedicated leader who understands the demand of his office and meets it as best he can despite choices that are not popular, choices that we, as constituents, may not fully understand or see the nuances of, then you’ll stand firm and take a temperate, hopeful view. Half-empty or half-full. For what it’s worth, and despite the knee-jerk tendency of Republicans to kick Obama any chance they get, I’ll leave you with GOP attack dog Senator Lindsay Graham’s take on the whole thing:Quote:“I’m a Verizon customer. I could care less if they’re looking at my phone records. … If you’re not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about.” http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/07/as-ny-times-attacks-obama-records-declassified-to-put-nsa-program-in-proper-perspective/
Quote:This collection of data has been going on in the seven years that the The Patriot Act has been in effect. It’s time to repeal that act and discuss whether we need or want to spend the money to collect and analyze all this data. Obama is not to blame for this mess. Those who passed and supported the Patriot Act are responsible for this ‘unintended’ consequence. All this noise proves is that Americans want to have their cake and eat it. For right wingers who ordinarily would defend an action taken to boost security, there will be a sudden outbreak of love for civil liberties since it is Obama involved. We are so schizophrenic! When there’s a terrorist attack, there are always retrospectively discovered clues which were ignored or not synthesized properly, and there appears a groundswell of criticism concerning poor intelligence. But when there are prospective attempts to gather information, here comes the groundswell in the opposite direction. It is not possible to perfectly conciliate these differences, but the advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches must be evaluated carefully and rationally, and we need to avoid kneejerk responses in either direction. I’d rather have my personal information be known by a bureaucrat than be killed by a terrorist. I have nothing to hide. Only people who worry about this kind of stuff are crooks, libertarians, media insiders, and liberals. For the folks, it is the cost of living in the world we have, not the one we want. It’s good to take the President to task over what seems an overreach of power, but I think part of the outrage stems from the fact that it comes from Obama. Seems that nobody is surprised or upset that President Bush started this policy. Where was the NY Times when the laws were voted in beginning with Bush?
Quote:“The unauthorized disclosure of a top secret U.S. court document threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation,” Clapper said of the phone-tracking program. [... ] “I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said.
Quote:_The program is conducted under authority granted by Congress and is authorized by the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Court which determines the legality of the program. _The government is prohibited from “indiscriminately sifting” through the data acquired. It can only be reviewed “when there is a reasonable suspicion, based on specific facts, that the particular basis for the query is associated with a foreign terrorist organization.” He also said only counterterrorism personnel trained in the program may access the records. _The information acquired is overseen by the Justice Department and the FISA court. Only a very small fraction of the records are ever reviewed, he said. _The program is reviewed every 90 days. Clapper said the Internet program, known as PRISM, can’t be used to intentionally target any Americans or anyone in the U.S, and that data accidentally collected about Americans is kept to a minimum.
Quote:“They help us prevent terrorist attacks,” Obama said. He said he has concluded that prevention is worth the “modest encroachments on privacy.” Obama said he came into office with a “healthy skepticism” of the program and increased some of the “safeguards” on the programs. He said Congress and federal judges have oversight on the program, and a judge would have to approve monitoring of the content of a call and it’s not a “program run amok.” “Nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” he said. “That’s not what this program’s about.”
Quote:It does not authorize snooping into the content of phone calls. But with millions of phone records in hand, the NSA’s computers can analyze them for patterns, spot unusual behavior and identify “communities of interest” – networks of people in contact with targets or suspicious phone numbers overseas.
Quote:We are not questioning the legality under the Patriot Act of the court order disclosed by The Guardian. But we strongly object to using that power in this manner. It is the very sort of thing against which Mr. Obama once railed, when he said in 2007 that the surveillance policy of the George W. Bush administration “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.” Perhaps, however, what the President discovered upon taking office is the fact of governing, not the presumption. Perhaps upon bearing the title and responsibility of President of the United States, he came to find the demand for hard choices, decisions and actions that, prior to the presidency, he had not been fully aware existed… just as none of us can presume to know the minutia, details, and sheer glut of expectation and responsibility a president faces every day in making those exact choices between “liberties we cherish and the security we provide.”
Quote:“I’m a Verizon customer. I could care less if they’re looking at my phone records. … If you’re not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about.”
Saturday, June 8, 2013 6:03 AM
WHOZIT
Saturday, June 8, 2013 6:06 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 9:10 AM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 9:20 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Amusing...where did I say I approve of any of it? I offered a bit of perspective...I HATE the Patriot Act and every goddamned thing that ever came along with it. I did at the time, I was vocal about it, I complained to my government, I still hate it, and all this does is show exactly what it does--what it was INTENDED TO DO from the very start. It's such a fucking game; righties were all in favor of it when Bush CREATED it, but now Obama's in office, omigawd he's HITLER! It's been going on all this time, but now how many threads are up about it right now, decrying it as The Single Worst Thing That Government Ever Did? Shees....
Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:03 AM
Quote:Amusing...where did I say I approve of any of it? I offered a bit of perspective...I HATE the Patriot Act and every goddamned thing that ever came along with it. I did at the time, I was vocal about it, I complained to my government, I still hate it, and all this does is show exactly what it does--what it was INTENDED TO DO from the very start. It's such a fucking game; righties were all in favor of it when Bush CREATED it, but now Obama's in office, omigawd he's HITLER! It's been going on all this time, but now how many threads are up about it right now, decrying it as The Single Worst Thing That Government Ever Did*?
Quote: ...and do it all while making everyone in every group, faction, subculture, race, religion, creed, color, or political party happy. Can’t be done, can it? But every president tries.
Quote:the nuances required of a president in balancing national security against civil liberties
Quote:“I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said.
Quote:“I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said. Of course it is, but..
Quote:Certainly civil liberties are essential to every American; our country was founded on the principle and we hold dear our rights to privacy in every area of our lives. But...
Quote:The fact is, as many commenters on the NY Times editorial pointed out, the Patriot Act was birthed by the Bush Administration and most on the right not only supported it, but felt it was an essential tool to preventing another 9/11. It either has or no other such attack was planned anyway… we’ll never truly know. But do we, as Americans, feel confident enough that it won’t happen again that we’d push against measures such as these in lieu of our privacy? Or, just as we’ve gotten used to taking off our shoes and subjecting ourselves to airport scans, can we accept that these times demand a personal sacrifice of some privacy for the greater good. as the President stated?
Quote:I’ll leave you with GOP attack dog Senator Lindsay Graham’s take on the whole thing:Quote:“I’m a Verizon customer. I could care less if they’re looking at my phone records. … If you’re not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about.” http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/07/as-ny-times-attacks-obama-records-declassified-to-put-nsa-program-in-proper-perspective/
Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Amusing...where did I say I approve of any of it? I offered a bit of perspective...I HATE the Patriot Act and every goddamned thing that ever came along with it. I did at the time, I was vocal about it, I complained to my government, I still hate it, and all this does is show exactly what it does--what it was INTENDED TO DO from the very start. It's such a fucking game; righties were all in favor of it when Bush CREATED it, but now Obama's in office, omigawd he's HITLER! It's been going on all this time, but now how many threads are up about it right now, decrying it as The Single Worst Thing That Government Ever Did*? I agree with you- for the rightwing, it's a fucking game. If this were a Repubican is office, they would be all for this: in fact, they were. And under the right circumstances, they will be again. But that wasn't what I got out of this editorial. Let me pick out the parts I found troublesome: Quote: ...and do it all while making everyone in every group, faction, subculture, race, religion, creed, color, or political party happy. Can’t be done, can it? But every president tries. Wow. Really? Even GW Bush? Quote:the nuances required of a president in balancing national security against civil liberties I think Obama uses nuance to attain his desired ends, by soothing and smoothing people so they don't react with the appropriate horror and indignation. Quote:“I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said.They will be absolutely non-transparent about all of this. It's their job. And, to repeat-Quote:“I believe it is important for the American people to understand the limits of this targeted counterterrorism program and the principles that govern its use,” he said. Of course it is, but.."But" what? Quote:Certainly civil liberties are essential to every American; our country was founded on the principle and we hold dear our rights to privacy in every area of our lives. But... "But" what? Quote:It does not authorize snooping into the content of phone calls. But with millions of phone records in hand, the NSA’s computers can analyze them for patterns, spot unusual behavior and identify “communities of interest” – networks of people in contact with targets or suspicious phone numbers overseas. Oh, so people become guilty of... knowing people? Whatever happened to freedom of association? Quote:The fact is, as many commenters on the NY Times editorial pointed out, the Patriot Act was birthed by the Bush Administration and most on the right not only supported it, but felt it was an essential tool to preventing another 9/11. It either has or no other such attack was planned anyway… we’ll never truly know. But do we, as Americans, feel confident enough that it won’t happen again that we’d push against measures such as these in lieu of our privacy? Or, just as we’ve gotten used to taking off our shoes and subjecting ourselves to airport scans, can we accept that these times demand a personal sacrifice of some privacy for the greater good. as the President stated? Well, this commentary is definitely sidling over to the Repubican view. Quote:I’ll leave you with GOP attack dog Senator Lindsay Graham’s take on the whole thing:Quote:“I’m a Verizon customer. I could care less if they’re looking at my phone records. … If you’re not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about.” http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/07/as-ny-times-attacks-obama-records-declassified-to-put-nsa-program-in-proper-perspective/ Sound like rappy, donnit? The "perspective" that I got out of this... probably not YOUR perspective... is that poor Obama is trying, he really is, but in this brave new world you just have to put your civil liberties on hold while the government engages in programs it will never fully tell you about, achieving results (if any) you have no right to know about, for your own good.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:47 AM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 12:13 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: And try not to let rappy, zit, jongsie, PN, and other RW-crazies dissuade you from finding the truth.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 12:30 PM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Oh, I know, a complete waste of time. The right is on a tear and can't see anything beyond making Benghazi, the IRS and this the Biggest Stories In The World, and comparing Obama to Hitler, etc., etc. But this is a fact; many, MANY of us were out there screaming about the potential overreach of Patriot Act, etc., when Bush instituted it. Didn't we all know this day would come, and they would be screaming bloody murder when it did?
Saturday, June 8, 2013 12:46 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 2:34 PM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: This collection of data has been going on in the seven years that the The Patriot Act has been in effect. It’s time to repeal that act and discuss whether we need or want to spend the money to collect and analyze all this data. Obama is not to blame for this mess. Those who passed and supported the Patriot Act are responsible for this ‘unintended’ consequence.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 2:45 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 2:47 PM
Quote:Point of fact, it's bad when the govt does this, no matter who is in charge. But in light of Barry's lying, and the lying of his underlings, it's all the more troubling. With Bush, it was the POTENTIAL for a govt run amok to start punishing its citizens. With Barry... it's reality.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 2:53 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 3:03 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Point of fact, it's bad when the govt does this, no matter who is in charge. But in light of Barry's lying, and the lying of his underlings, it's all the more troubling. With Bush, it was the POTENTIAL for a govt run amok to start punishing its citizens. With Barry... it's reality. This person, who has not yet admitted to the REALITY of no WMD, talks about reality?
Saturday, June 8, 2013 3:14 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 3:29 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: I note that Darrell Issa voted for the Patriot Act at every opportunity.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 3:31 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 3:49 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: I note that many Congresspeople who are now claiming to be horrified about the program voted for it many times, and were briefed on it. How about making a list of people currently in office who had knowledge of and vote for (like Feinstein and Issa) and never vote for them again?
Saturday, June 8, 2013 4:13 PM
Saturday, June 8, 2013 4:18 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: I note that Darrell Issa voted for the Patriot Act at every opportunity. Also, GEEZER, I went to the original 2001 vote, and out of the approx 218 Repubican reps, only THREE voted "no". As I counted it, approx 32% Dems voted "no", versus 3% Repubs. Where did you get your figures from?
Quote:In any case, this IS a bi-partisan problem.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 4:53 PM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by whozit: Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Amusing...where did I say I approve of any of it? I offered a bit of perspective...I HATE the Patriot Act and every goddamned thing that ever came along with it. I did at the time, I was vocal about it, I complained to my government, I still hate it, and all this does is show exactly what it does--what it was INTENDED TO DO from the very start. It's such a fucking game; righties were all in favor of it when Bush CREATED it, but now Obama's in office, omigawd he's HITLER! It's been going on all this time, but now how many threads are up about it right now, decrying it as The Single Worst Thing That Government Ever Did? Shees.... "The Single Worst Thing Government Ever Did", Government is made up with people, which "people" gave the go ahead, some names would be nice. A bulding didn't give the go ahead. Someone with a name caused this mess.
Saturday, June 8, 2013 9:03 PM
Quote:what I've not seen is evidence which would lead me to believe that , under Bush, or the Patriot act, there was wide spread spying ( warrantless wiretaps ) of the entire US population. Hell, J Edgar Hoover spied on who ever the hell he wanted to, and this was 40-50 years ago! Long before there was a Patriot Act! So saying Bush was doing it , as opposed to any other President, seemed silly. Sure, he could have, so could have Clinton, Bush41, Reagan, Carter...... so what ? Where's the PROOF that W did any such thing ???
Quote:All that whining and gnashing of teeth over the Patriot Act, and yet when REAL Gov't control over your very life comes to fruition [ie healthcare!], many of you cheer ?
Quote:Why is it when ever this President tries to do something which helps protect this country from a very real threat of ISLAMIC terrorism, a specific group of whiners tries to portray it as a fate worse than getting your head cut off ? Whether it's disrupting the financial transactions of terrorist groups, intercepting their phone calls or trying to get relevent information out of those who have sworn to murder as many innocent men/women and children as possible, some still see it as a violation of OUR rights that this Gov't should take steps to protect its citizens"
Quote:I've always liked the Patriot Act and I'm glad Obama signed it again. In fact he's done many suprisingly good things recently that I admire him for. He's definitely raised his Presidential credentials in the national defense arena at least, and he will be quite difficult to defeat next year unless the economy gets even worse.
Quote:Point of fact, it's bad when the govt does this, no matter who is in charge.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 2:47 AM
Quote:So, now that Obama has had control for it for 4 1/2 years, you're fine w/ it ? .... Cause it was super bad when Bush did it, but Barry? Naww.... he's cool.... Or am I missing your point ?
Quote: I HATE the Patriot Act and every goddamned thing that ever came along with it. I did at the time, I was vocal about it, I complained to my government, I still hate it
Sunday, June 9, 2013 3:29 AM
Sunday, June 9, 2013 5:35 AM
Sunday, June 9, 2013 6:08 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: And Barry said the war on terror was over, so what gives? W's excuse was to fight Islamo-fanaticals. Barry seems to think the TEA party citizens & FOX news are the Big Bad.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 7:15 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Bullshit. What you want to believe, nothing more.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 7:25 AM
NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: There had been no proof that in `09 W was spying on everyone.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 8:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: I note that many Congresspeople who are now claiming to be horrified about the program voted for it many times, and were briefed on it. How about making a list of people currently in office who had knowledge of and vote for (like Feinstein and Issa) and never vote for them again? Think that some of ( most ? all ? ) of these folks who voted for it were possibly lied to, when told to what extent this stuff went ?
Sunday, June 9, 2013 8:08 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: There had been no proof that in `09 W was spying on everyone. Maddow's vid shows the full extent & that's just now coming out.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 8:14 AM
Sunday, June 9, 2013 8:33 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: There had been no proof that in `09 W was spying on everyone. Maddow's vid shows the full extent & that's just now coming out. If you think it's "just now coming out", then you haven't been paying any attention for the last several years. This was well known by pretty much everybody who wasn't watching FauxNews back in 2006, and was being reported on at the time.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 10:54 AM
Quote:Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat: Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: There had been no proof that in `09 W was spying on everyone. Nice try. Bush was only President in 2009 until Jan 20.
Sunday, June 9, 2013 5:01 PM
Monday, June 10, 2013 5:37 AM
Monday, June 10, 2013 6:07 AM
BYTEMITE
Monday, June 10, 2013 6:08 AM
Quote:So what started out as a blazingly brilliant idea-The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects I would argue that "effects" includes phones against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized has turned - with the help of people like Zero and Geezer- into... Well except if can scavenge evidence from someone else... mumble mumble... reasonable expectation of privacy... room for disagreement..mumble mumble... good faith... And what I find creepy about the whole concept is how corporations are allowed to invade privacy in ways that neither governments nor individuals are allowed... and the government can use it. It's just two corrupt institutions leaning on each other. The first question SHOULD be whether this trolling on a massive scale was even necessary. If it was all so necessary, since Qwest refused to turn over records why didn't the government pursue the information with a warant? Secondly- and this is for another thread- why are corporations allowed to invade your privacy and inhibit your free expression in ways that neither government not individuals are allowed? Why do we allow corporations to be favored by law in all areas: taxation, theft, privacy, free speech- etc? Why have we vested corporations with the status of a "super person" and allowed them to run roughshod over everyone?
Monday, June 10, 2013 7:05 AM
Monday, June 10, 2013 7:17 AM
Quote:You can present all of the evidence in the world: historic Federal revenue charts, statements by Bush that Saddam indeed didn't have WMD, isotopic charts and graphs- and rappy will obdurately refuse to acknowledge reality.
Monday, June 10, 2013 10:40 AM
Monday, June 10, 2013 11:14 AM
Monday, June 10, 2013 12:06 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Monday, June 10, 2013 5:35 PM
Monday, June 10, 2013 6:20 PM
Quote:Siggy, who's deaf, dumb & blind to Maxine's comments ? That'd be Y-o-u.
Monday, June 10, 2013 7:52 PM
PIRATENEWS
John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!
Quote:Operative Nikovich2 wrote: But we are no longer in the world of the 17oos; we are in a world of sophisticated terrorist networks, thuggish criminals hell-bent on fulfilling zealous crusades; global enemies who have no compunction about inflicting mass destruction on a country once protected by muskets and bayonets. And far from the days of town criers and the Pony Express, we now have a brilliant, instant and international information network that allows communication between our enemies to be transacted in the blink of an eye. And it is in this world we expect our leaders to keep us safe. Can we reconcile the challenge of that?
Quote:"A circumcision ritual practiced by some Orthodox Jews has alarmed city health officials, who say it may have led to three cases of herpes - one of them fatal - in infants. But after months of meetings with Orthodox leaders, city officials have been unable to persuade them to abandon the practice. The practice is known as oral suction, or in Hebrew, metzitzah b'peh: after removing the foreskin of the penis, the practitioner, or mohel, sucks the blood from the wound to clean it." -Andy Newman, New York Times, "City Questions Circumcision Ritual After Baby Dies," August 26, 2005 http://nytimes.com/2005/08/26/nyregion/26circumcise.html http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/09/03/rabbis-will-defy-law-on-circumcision-ritual/ http://piratenews.org/pedophile-jewish-rabbis-kill-babies.html "The FBI added Adam Gadahn to the Most Wanted Terrorist list and the U.S. State Department is offering a reward up to $1 million for his arrest. A 28-year-old California man has been indicted on federal charges of treason and providing material support to a terrorist group for making a series of propaganda videotapes for al Qaeda, including one in which he praised the hijackers involved in the 9/11 attacks. 'Adam Gadahn represents a new breed of home-grown extremist, who has chosen to betray the country of his birth,' FBI Executive Assistant Director Willie Hulon said during a press conference Wednesday in Washington, D.C." -FBI Most Wanted http://www.fbi.gov/page2/oct2006/gadahn101106.htm "In Sept of last year, Adam Gadahn [aka Adam Perlman], the son of Jewish parents, the son of Jewish grandparents [who are on the board of directors of Jewish ADL] in Southern California, who himself converted to Islam, went on to become Osama Bin Laden's spokesman." -Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-CA), Jewish chairman Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment CSPAN, Use of the Internet by Terrorists: Using the Web as a Weapon for 9/11 Truth, November 6, 2007 http://www.piratenews.org/flight93.html Jew Rep Jane Harman resigns after caught on NSA Tape Agreeing to Lobby for Israel Spies = TREASON www.republicbroadcasting.org/?p=1364 "Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races, as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." -Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to Kenneset http://www.rense.com/general45/master.htm http://www.texemarrs.com/112003/jewish_master_race.htm
Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Siggy, who's deaf, dumb & blind to Maxine's comments ? That'd be Y-o-u. Before I respond to this on-point, let me ask you a question so you can check your logic circuits... Did it not trip any question in YOUR mind that the clip that has your brain on overload didn't include the question??? So, do you have the fuck ANY idea what database Maxine was talking about??? Or are databases all the same to you?
Tuesday, June 11, 2013 4:02 AM
Quote:Doesn't matter.
Quote:What really matters
Quote:is that Obama claimed his admin would be the MOST transparent, ever
Quote: Doesn't matter that there wasn't the stockpiles or programs of WMD that we were told.
Quote:and all he's done is expand on
Quote:the very things the Left railed against when Bush was in office.
Quote: His IRS is taking the 5th, on matters of clear political targeting. And Snowden , traitor that he is, has stated that what was select looking into foreign terrorists, has now evolved into casting a net over the entire US population. That took place, when? Under Obama.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL